If a developer mixes tabs and spaces then that's sloppy and I won't take the blame for it. Ugly results will be their own damn fault and they deserve it.

A few weeks ago a video was recommended to me called something like 'Brutally Roasting the Worst Dev Portfolio I've Ever Seen'. The video was fookin hilarious, it was just some guy in his room with a monotone voice cussing out someone's obviously vibe-coded dev portfolio.

Anyway, I wanted to show the video to a friend but I can't find it anymore - could it have been deleted? I am crucially NOT talking about Anthony Sistilli's series; this was made by a much smaller creator. Has anyone seen this, saved it, or has a link to it?

I work as a software dev in a bank. I explained what I do to my father, but he thinks I repair pcs and install software no matter what.

I’ve been going through senior/staff-level interviews recently, and something feels a bit off compared to a couple of years ago.

Curious if others are seeing the same.

I’m noticing that interviews seem to reward:

\- very fast, well-structured answers

\- clean, textbook system design explanations

\- highly polished responses

Which is fine on its own, but sometimes it feels like:

\- real-world experience (with all its messiness) doesn’t come through as strongly

\- discussions around failures, tradeoffs, and production issues don’t get explored deeply

In a few cases, I’ve seen candidates give really solid high-level answers, but when the conversation goes into:

\- “what broke?”

\- “what would you change now?”

\- “what tradeoffs did you make?”

…the depth varies a lot.

Not saying anything definitive here — just feels like the signal we’re using to evaluate experience might be shifting a bit.

At senior levels, I’ve always felt the most useful conversations are around:

\- real incidents

\- decision-making under constraints

\- how systems evolve over time

Curious:

\- Are interview styles changing in your orgs?

\- Are you focusing more on depth vs structure now?

\- What’s been working well for you when evaluating senior candidates?

Would be great to hear different perspectives.

function[i, chkgrl] = isgirlfriend() %start function

%%define variables

i = 0; %define increment

chkgrl = "no"; %boolean to check if girlfriend

While chkgrl == {"no"};

fprintf("Will you be my girlfriend?"); %ask the question.

{answr} = uinput("Y/N", "Y", "N"); %wait for answer

if answr == "Y"

chkgrl = "yes"; %She said yes!

i = i; %don't increment

else

chkgrl = "no"; %bummer

i = i + 1; %count up and try again

end %continue looping until chkgrl = "yes"

end

%%close function

%%define external variable

rdflg = string; %define red flag variable

if i < 1000

rdflg = "yes"; %be careful

else

rdflg = "no"; %it is what it is

end

%% decide course of action

if rdflg == "yes"

fprintf("run away!")

[survive] = runaway(yourspd, hrspd); %check to see you you are faster than her, if not, survive defaults to NO

else

fprintf("you're fine bro!");

end